Talk:ValuJet Airlines

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	Aviation Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Airlines WikiProject

[edit] If the mechanics had had the confidence to write on the oxygen generators . . .

And if the corporate culture had supported this confidence!

Let's suppose a mechanic writes on the label of one of the oxygen generators in big black magic marker--"These burn at 500 degrees Fahrenheit!!"

And he shows it to his boss. The boss says, okay. It's the noncommital okay. It's the okay of zen acceptance. And later on, the boss comes back and says to him, 'Now, it might be a good idea, and it certainly is the signature, salient fact about these cannisters, but can you tell me what the label said before you wrote over it?' [And he might well use words like 'salient' and 'signature.' People of all social classes like artful language. It also serves to lighten the mood.] And they might have a good discussion about the labels. True, they are techno-speak, engineer-speak, and worse of all, corporate-speak. But they might, just maybe, have some valuable information behind all the corporate bullshit. The boss decides, 'I'll tell you what, you can get other people to write over the labels, you can get other people involved, provided, provided they read the label first.'

And it becomes participatory. The labels are read, maybe laughingly, maybe only skimmingly, but at least they are read. Real discussion happens. And it adds two-way conversation to the corporate culture.

And the boss sends an email one level up. 'Hey, look what we're doing. And I think it's a hec of a good idea.' And the pattern repeats itself. The pattern of 'okay,' the step back, and the zen acceptance. The gentle coaching, and giving people the okay as long as they are moving in a generally positive direction. We are allowing open fields for people to operate, we are allowing people's natural competence and natural concern about safety to come forth. The cannisters do burn at five hundred degrees Fahrenheit. And that should be stated in good clear English.

And of course we are light years from such a corporate culture.

Cool Nerd 03:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Debate On Name Change

I think that the article on 597 should be merged here. I am going to do it. TastemyHouse 21:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

ValuJet does not currently operate as AirTran Airways. The companies merged, but what was ValuJet is not AirTran. The planes, leadership, business model are all different. That line should be deleted. If the user wants to see how the current AirTran was formed they should visit the AirTran page. The two carriers have seperate pages for a reason.

Welcome to Wikipedia and documenting history. Things change but that does not change the past or how things came to be. Valujet became Airtran -- this is documented by SEC filings, quotes in CNN (and other respected media outlets), and even recent media reports. Keep in mind that it hasn't even been 10 years since Valujet renamed and even if it had been, the foundation of the company will stay the same. It's very apparent to everyone else editing this article that many people are motivated to try to remove the horrific history of AirTran -- nobody tries to remove the non-tragic history of Valujet/Airtran, only the portions that reflect poorly on Airtran. Continental Airlines has history dating back over 70 years. Dbchip 22:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Since you are a tad snippy about this I will try to lay things out to you in a clear and concise manner. I wrote my college thesis on the history of ValuJet and AirTran and it was me who wrote the original articles for both carriers, so please do not try to school me on how to write a proper article. ValuJet and AirTran merged, that goes without saying. That was stated in both articles. My contention is with your statement about the foundation of the company being the same. If you look back to articles written on the 10th anniversary of the crash of Flight 592, just one in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution mentioned the ValuJet-AirTran connection, dozens of others across the nation did not because most people who look at this with an open mind realize the fact that AirTran is not ValuJet. AirTran has the youngest fleet in America, they do not outsource maintence, they replaced the management who were in charge of ValuJet, etc. etc. You show your bias very clearly when you talk about "the horrific history of AirTran". That is clearly a loaded and inappropriate statement. I do not want to remove the history of AirTran or ValuJet, I just find the statement "ValuJet currently operates as AirTran" to be inaccurate. To mention the merger is perfectly fine and should be included but the statement that you insist on included is not accurate and should be removed.